Out-of-print math books: An Update - Theory

Thanks, Tim. I voted on the books; and I added my suggestion:
'Recursive Functions' by Peter.

MoeBlee

tchow@lsa.umich.edu schreef in news:48e54704$0$297$b45e6eb0@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu

> Not long ago I suggested the possibility of a website for collecting
> information about the demand for various out-of-print math books.
> Klaus Schmid promptly set up http://outofprintmath.blogspot.com

Nice initiative, but that page is more complicated than necessary, slow and hard to handle.
Why should votes against a book be counted, and why should I vote when I don't or barely need a book?
If I don't vote, I don't need to give a reason either. There are zillions of books I'm not looking for.

Make it simple: put a single checkbox in front of each title and one button at the end of the page and count the votes.

Recently I found that a title I was looking for since 1987,
Computer approximations by J.F. Hart et al., is available in print again.

--
Alex.

In article <48e8e009$0$197$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Alex Plantema <alex@nl.invalid> wrote:
>Nice initiative, but that page is more complicated than necessary, slow
>and hard to handle.

Thanks for the feedback...I'll pass it on to Klaus.

We know that the site is not well-designed, but wanted to get something up
quickly as a proof of concept. I think the ideal situation is for a large
bookselling site to incorporate the concept into their site. However, I
have not had much luck with that angle yet.
--
Tim Chow tchow-at-alum-dot-mit-dot-edu
The range of our projectiles---even ... the artillery---however great, will
never exceed four of those miles of which as many thousand separate us from
the center of the earth. ---Galileo, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences

On 05 Oct 2008 18:23:44 GMT, tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote:

>I think the ideal situation is for a large
>bookselling site

.... mentioning no names! ... ;-)

>to incorporate the concept into their site.

--
Angus Rodgers
(twirlip@ eats spam; reply to angusrod@)
Contains mild peril

In article <gj1ie41lkggdbvls9effst5ran9aaqcq4p@4ax.com>,
Angus Rodgers <twirlip@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>On 05 Oct 2008 18:23:44 GMT, tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote:
>>I think the ideal situation is for a large
>>bookselling site
>
>... mentioning no names! ... ;-)

I wasn't being coy; Amazon isn't the only possibility. There's Alibris,
Bookfinder, Barnes & Noble, AddAll, .... Even Google Books, although they
don't sell books. I got BooksPrice and Fetchbook.Info somewhat interested
in the concept, though I don't know if they'll actually implement it.
--
Tim Chow tchow-at-alum-dot-mit-dot-edu
The range of our projectiles---even ... the artillery---however great, will
never exceed four of those miles of which as many thousand separate us from
the center of the earth. ---Galileo, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences

tchow@lsa.umich.edu writes:
>
> Not long ago I suggested the possibility of a website for collecting
> information about the demand for various out-of-print math books. Klaus
> Schmid promptly set up http://outofprintmath.blogspot.com

As an alternative, effort would be better spent on ensuring
such books make it into the scan queue of the various programs
that are scanning books. That way publishers can offer online
copies at minimal cost and, until then, one can search the
books and view limited previews. Since hardcopy books will
soon be dinosaurs, why waste effort on such?

--Bill Dubuque

In article <y8z3ajaptuk.fsf@nestle.csail.mit.edu>,
Bill Dubuque <wgd@nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote:
>tchow@lsa.umich.edu writes:
>>
>> Not long ago I suggested the possibility of a website for collecting
>> information about the demand for various out-of-print math books. Klaus
>> Schmid promptly set up http://outofprintmath.blogspot.com
>
>As an alternative, effort would be better spent on ensuring
>such books make it into the scan queue of the various programs
>that are scanning books. That way publishers can offer online
>copies at minimal cost and, until then, one can search the
>books and view limited previews. Since hardcopy books will
>soon be dinosaurs, why waste effort on such?

I have no objection to your proposal---it is a good one---except for your
suggestion that there is something incompatible between making a book
available electronically and making a book available in hardcopy.

The debate about hardcopy books versus electronic books can sometimes
take on a partisan character, reminiscent of partisan religious or political
debates. Your comments above are a good example of the kind of partisanship
that I'm referring to. While I have no problems with someone spending effort
trying to make a book available either electronically or in hardcopy, I do
object if someone tries to *impede* efforts on the other side of the partisan
divide.
--
Tim Chow tchow-at-alum-dot-mit-dot-edu
The range of our projectiles---even ... the artillery---however great, will
never exceed four of those miles of which as many thousand separate us from
the center of the earth. ---Galileo, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences

tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote:
>Bill Dubuque <wgd@nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote:
>>tchow@lsa.umich.edu writes:
>>>
>>> Not long ago I suggested the possibility of a website for collecting
>>> information about the demand for various out-of-print math books. Klaus
>>> Schmid promptly set up http://outofprintmath.blogspot.com
>>
>> As an alternative, effort would be better spent on ensuring
>> such books make it into the scan queue of the various programs
>> that are scanning books. That way publishers can offer online
>> copies at minimal cost and, until then, one can search the
>> books and view limited previews. Since hardcopy books will
>> soon be dinosaurs, why waste effort on such?
>
> I have no objection to your proposal---it is a good one---except for your
> suggestion that there is something incompatible between making a book
> available electronically and making a book available in hardcopy.

Incompatible, why would you think that? Certainly one could
simultaneously pursue both approaches.

> The debate about hardcopy books versus electronic books can sometimes
> take on a partisan character, reminiscent of partisan religious or political
> debates. Your comments above are a good example of the kind of partisanship
> that I'm referring to. While I have no problems with someone spending effort
> trying to make a book available either electronically or in hardcopy, I do
> object if someone tries to *impede* efforts on the other side of the partisan
> divide.

Indeed, such is the nature of technological (r)evolution. Debates
still rage about vinyl records vs. cd vs mp3, ****og vs. digital
amplifiers, projectors, etc. There will always be those who cling
to the past for whatever reasons. I'm ecstatic that I can carry
around my entire library in my pocket. Whenever a spark of intuition
strikes, I can access whatever information I need in seconds, not
hours, days, or months. I can rapidly search millions of documents
to recall long-forgotten ideas from decades ago; locate related
work; find definitions, translate foreign language texts, etc, etc.
So, seriously, why do you prefer paper media, which lack all these
capabilities and many more?

--Bill Dubuque

On Oct 5, 5:40 pm, "Alex Plantema" <a...@nl.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
> Why should votes against a book be counted, and why should I vote when I don't or barely need a book?

All votings are optional and independent from each other. There might
be many reasons, why you don't need a book. You can promote your
reason for or against a book by posting a comment below the
corresponding voting. Comments are optional, but they might help to
promote your vote.

> Make it simple: put a single checkbox in front of each title and
> one button at the end of the page and count the votes.

If several items are defined in one voting at one time, no further
items can be added later. I think this is appropriate, because
pressing the vote button for a list of items normally has a different
meaning.

I am aware that the current voting list is kludge and the loading
behaviour, depending on your environment, could be better. Using
Firefox it is still acceptable for me and I am working to reduce the
voting list to improve the visibility and promotion of the most
promising items. See also my comment about cleanup on the Discussion
subpage.

Please note also, that there is no need to scan the list repeatedly
for new book submissions, the newest are always on top of the list and
all new comments including new book submissions are listed on
http://outofprintmath-comments.blogspot.com/.

Thank you for this and any further suggestions.

-- Klaus Schmid